Taking into consideration that the “The Chimney Sweeper” by William Blake was published in 1789 and that England was going through the Industrial Revolution; one can clearly perceive the social criticism expressed by the author.

“And so he was quiet, and that very night, As Tom was a-sleeping he had such a sight! That thousands of sweepers, Dick, Joe, Ned, and Jack, Were all of them locked up in coffins of black.”

The passage encourages us to position more critically before the phenomenon of industrialization and mass production. Dick, Joe, Ned and Jack symbolize the people in general; common names for common people incarcerated by capitalism.

“And by came an Angel who had a bright key, And he opened the coffins & set them all free; Then down a green plain, leaping, laughing they run, And wash in a river and shine in the Sun.”

Then, a divine entity comes to set the kids for free and they are finally able to experience childhood. Nonetheless, it is a dream. Even though the boys wake up and their hard work routine starts all over again, Tom was happy to keep sweeping chimneys because the “angel” advised him in his dream that if “all do their duty, they need not fear harm”. At this point, one can identify verbal irony in poem since the words said by the narrator are opposed to what sweeping chimneys and child exploitation really meant during the Industrial Revolution. Another interesting point, is the link between religious images such as the “angel” and mass alienation, which shows that the author probably adopted a Marxist position in response to the changing world of the Industrial Revolution. Such position is also another strong element used by the author in order to create irony in his poem.

“And so Tom awoke; and we rose in the dark, and got with our bags and our brushes to work.”

The end of the poem is actually very disturbing; the children “rose in the dark” which symbolizes how reduced their life perspectives were. In other words, the poem sets up an atmosphere characterized by helplessness, which leads the readers to think that inciting outrage was the mechanism that the author used to reach his goal of creating awareness of the problems of child exploitation and alienation from the self.

In order to identify and explicate common elements among the essays of Achebe, Chinweizu and Ngugi, I believe it would be relevant to mention the historical context of colonization and decolonization processes in Africa. Besides reflecting on the outcomes of colonialism and neo-colonialism, the three essays in a certain way represent a response to each other. In other words, I believe that when comparing the three essays, Achebe sort of sets the ground for discussing territorial, mental and intellectual colonization, while Chinweizu and Ngugi develop and deepen Achebe’s thoughts.

The African colonization process when analyzed through the perspective of exploitation can certainly be characterized as cruel and unfair. Allan Lester, in his article “ Settlers, the State and the Colonial Power: The Colonization of Queen Adelaide Province, 1834-37”, considers that the nineteenth century is featured as a period of dramatic changes in the African political scenario in which African kingdoms and empires suffered deep modifications in their political structure. In the long run, political instability aligned to lack of competitive technological warfare, results in the Africans’ inability to organize and maintain effective resistance force against the European invaders. The so-called humanitarian aspect of colonialism hid despotic policies, which resulted in mental and intellectual colonization (1998, p. 237). Later on, in the age of decolonization, William Zartman in his article, “Europe and Africa: decolonization or dependency?” questions to what extent Africa is truly being decolonized. The author further elucidates that while sovereign and military control was removed from the African territory, Europe still kept exerting political and economic control. Last but not least, the European cultural conditioning remained affecting Africa and Africans in several areas such as the construction of knowledge in the “African literature” (1976, p. 326).

The concept of African literature has been intensively debated among African writers. Among the most popular topics are the imposed influence of European elements on Africans writers and the usage of English and other national languages when writing about African culture and literature. Gikandi (2008) delimits the occurrence of what is now known as modern African literature in the crucible of colonialism. He also clarifies that although oral literature and Arabic writing were thriving practices in the pre-colonial period, the current literary scholarship could not have happened if Africa and Europe had not faced an impactful encounter (p. 54). That said, much has been discussed about the state of African literature and its definition. For instance, during the Makerere University conference in 1962, the final verdict about African literature and its definition is, “creative writing in which an African setting is authentically handled or to which experiences originating in Africa are integral” (Ten, 2011). Nonetheless, Achebe (1975) discords with that small and neat definition; the author complements highlighting that African literature should not be seen as one single unit but as a group of connected units (246).

Assuming Achebe and Gikandi’s principles that African literature is a complex interaction between national and international cultural elements, one can clearly notice that in “Things Fall Apart”, Achebe responds to Conrad’s novel “The Heart of Darkness”, showing the clash between colonialism and traditional culture using the Africans’ point of view. Achebe provides Africans and the rest of the world with a different perspective about his country and culture. As a consequence, the author opens doors for other African authors to write about themselves and their culture as autonomous individuals. Old paradigms such as the classification of Africans as “rudimentary souls” presented by Conrad were fiercely questioned by Achebe (p.41). Later on, in “Decolonizing the African Mind”, Chinweizu (1987) urges the reader to start the “re-Africanization” process, in which consists of the restoration of the African cultural personality. Chinweizu believes that Africans were culturally conditioned by two different factors: the Europeans using industrial civilization as means of control and the Arabs using religion and the promises of the celestial kingdom. At this point, one can attribute the “dismantling of white supremacist beliefs” practice, suggested by Chinweizu as an element that is also present in Achebe and Ngugi’s works. For instance, Achebe in “ An image of Africa”, makes it clear through the statement, “ […] quite simply is the desire- one might say the need- in Western psychology to set Africa as a foil to Europe, as a place of negation, at once remote and vaguely familiar, in comparison with which Europe’s own state of spiritual grace will manifest […](p.108). In other words, the British point of view expressed by Conrad in his novel corresponds to an image of Africa as the antithesis of Europe and as a consequence, an antithesis of civilization. Thus, Achebe is angered by the Africans’ dehumanization presented by Conrad, which also resides in Chinweizu’s concept of “white supremacist beliefs”.

Another interesting point is the longstanding debate about using English as a communication vehicle of African literature. Ten (2011) interestingly sheds light on how Ngugi is appreciative of Achebe’s complex novels and to a certain extent was inspired by him. Nonetheless, Ngugi radically accused Achebe of betrayal because of using English when writing African literature. Furthermore, Ten (2011) explains Achebe’s “preference” for writing in English since it would be challenging to reach out for readership on a large scale if he published in his mother language. For Achebe, the advantages of promoting African literature and preserving Africans’ history and customs using English, surpass the disadvantage of also promoting the “oppressors’ language”. On the opposite end of the spectrum in the debate, Ngugi fiercely attacks the usage of English when writing about African literature. Ngugi’s point of view is that besides being a communication vehicle, language also carries a nation’s culture, history, tradition and ideals (p.02). Indeed, to some extent, one might wonder if deep cultural aspects of a given nation would not be possibly lost in translation when switching from the mother tongue to a national language such as English. How authentically and effectively portrayed would the African culture be, if the writer is taking the risk to lose the intricacies of his mother tongue? In addition, Ngugi (1993) addresses what is almost a lack of respect to Africa and its culture; the so-called experts in African literature are not required to have a minimum knowledge or familiarity with any African language. It is almost unquestionable that a French literature expert would have to know how to speak the French language. While both Achebe and Ngugi are concerned about preserving disappearing cultures, Achebe seems to be more acquiescent to the reality of post-colonial Africa. Contrarily, Ngugi acts more radically and calls for resistance against ongoing oppression in a continent under the influence of neo-colonialism.

Another common element among the essays of Achebe, Chinweizu and Ngugi can be represented by an excerpt of a 2008 Transition interview in which Achebe affirms that, “I think that where we’re headed is the final realization that Africans are people: nothing more and nothing less.” Whether through Achebe’s common sense, Ngugi’s radical attitudes or Chinweizu’s exhortation to critical thinking, all of them urge the readers to notice Africans as people: “nothing more and nothing less”. Thus, the understanding of Africans as people also means the understanding of their full intellectual, cultural, political and economic capabilities. In “Creating Space for a Hundred Flowers to Bloom”, Ngugi (1993) brilliantly recalls how literary and intellectual movements are often a reaction to social and economic domination. For instance, one might cite the Negritude Movement in which the writer Senghor shifted the ideology of response to racism to a political movement exhorting Africa’s independence. Although there are several definitions of the Negritude Movement, it is quite complex to achieve a common denominator since it addressed many areas of thought. Examples are Sartre’s definition as “antiracism racism” and Irele’s as “the quest for identity in the heritage of African civilizations’ histories” (Lowder, 2003, p. 4). Another interesting aspect to point out is that the evolution of the Negritude Movement also reflects Senghor’s life. In other words, Senghor’s duel identity as an African and French man and his struggles to integration reflected on his writings. As consequence, the Negritude Movement was a product of colonialism, as was Senghor.

To conclude, one might infer that probably the most important common element among Achebe, Chinweizu and Ngugi’s essays is the fully realization of Africans as capable people. In order to acknowledge Africans as capable people, it is important to respect the African culture and their sovereignty as means of collaborative production with other nations, not submissiveness. The three authors recognize the need of interaction with European nations, however, the Europhone should have its proper place; as a “footnote in African literature” (Ngugi, 1993, p. 156). Also, the three authors believe in learning and enriching through diversity, provided that Africans apply their critical thinking and decide whether or not to use foreign elements to their benefit. The decolonization process is more than an external battle; it is a battle within each individual against ingrained cultural conditioning.

The story written by William Faulkner is a mix of suspense and mystery. The narrator speaks on behalf of the town’s collective voice and pictures Miss Emily as a character full of interesting yet strange psychological traits. Besides being a Southern woman who comes from an aristocratic family, who was Miss Emily? Although the townspeople would prefer to see Miss Emily as an idol, the reader could realize that the main character had psychological problems. First, she held her dead father at home for four days in a Freudian denial attitude. Then, when she finally started having a relationship, her insecurity and low self-esteem drove her to buy arsenic and soon after that, her boyfriend mysteriously disappeared. Those elements together would’ve given us an idea of what was happening; however, other elements such as the tax issues and the judgmental tone towards African – American people and women distracted us. Those facts, added to the chronological aspect of the story were mixed, which caused the diversion of the reader’s focus.

The setting reflects Miss Emily’s inner situation. A dark and dusty house, humid and moldy furniture and appliances, antiques, faded colors, tarnished silver and gold objects; all of that, transmit the feeling of an individual who was trying to resist change. Miss Emily wanted to ignore the world and its modifications. Emotionally, she could not face changes. She was buried in her house, in the memories of her beloved father, in her own confused feelings and in her dusty furniture. The elements that composed the physical setting conveyed a gloomy and mysterious mood to the reader. The narrator uses “we”, which denotes a first person plural point of view. The narrator seems to know Miss Emily very well since she/he mentions details of her house and even evaluate Miss Emily as being a “[…] tradition, a duty, and a care; a sort of hereditary obligation upon the town[…]”. The narrator makes clear that Miss Emily was an alive entity who incited curiosity and even fear in the population of Jefferson.

One could attempt to analyze Miss Emily personality going through several different paths; from a person who suffers from conditions such as Schizophrenia to the extreme of classifying her as a sociopath or necrophiliac. Nonetheless, I’ll attempt to sketch her personality profile based on Freudian concepts such as Defense Mechanisms, Oedipus Complex and a concept coined by Kenneth Adams, the Covert or Emotional Incest. Throughout the story, besides a great-aunt and two distant female cousins, Miss Emily did not have any feminine figure cohabiting with her. That makes one wonder how the relationship between Miss Emily and her father was structured without the role of a “mother” between them throughout the years. I believe that her father would establish and reinforce this emotional incestuous relationship by attributing Miss Emily the role of “wife”, which might not have been physical but psychological. That is demonstrated in the story by “We remembered all the young men her father had driven away […]”. When her father died, Miss Emily clung to the body in denial of his death for four days. She was extremely attached to the figure of the father in different aspects and she would fiercely grieve her idealized “husband”. For instance, “[…] none of the young men were quite good enough for Miss Emily and such,” denotes the idealization that Miss Emily would have about her father. In order to interest her, a man would have to resemble her father; not physical, but psychological resemblance. As one could admit, it would be extremely difficult for Miss Emily to fulfill her idealization. As a consequence, she had many years of mourning and developed into an egotist, conceited, attached and perverse individual. As such, the house became her refuge, a place stopped in time, where she could revive her memories and feel psychologically comfortable. After years of grieving, she finally met a person with the possibility of staying with her. Nonetheless, one of Miss Emily’s traits was insecurity, which could also be extended to fear of loss. In an attempt to resolve the situation, she carefully prepared her bridal room and planned Homer Barron’s death. At that point, her contact with reality was disrupted and she started living under the illusion of having Homer Barron as her husband. As opposed to what happened to her father, no one knew Homer Barron was dead. This time, the residents of Jefferson would not be able to take Homer Barron away from her since everyone thought he’d abandoned Miss Emily. Meanwhile, all the gossipy and narrow minded people from the town of Jefferson could not realize that Miss Emily was not just a mere entertaining object but, she was mentally disturbed.

To conclude, I strongly believe that Miss Emily was a lady who had a dysfunctional relationship with her father since her childhood. She and her father had this emotional incestuous relationship in which the father attributed her with duties of a spouse. Later in her life, she started seeing her father as if he was her “husband”. They might have never had a physical incest, but the emotional burden was placed and disrupted Miss Emily’s life until the end. That transformed her in an egotist, attached, insecure and perverse woman.